661 Oil Test 32:1 vs 40:1 vs 50:1 ?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
ok we'll take this step by step...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad "I disagree with your stmt that 32:1 is too rich." - Don't take what I said out of context. Here is what I said for the 3rd time! - redbull660 said:

I still like that mastermind and others have had such good results with H1R....even at what seems to be too rich of a mixture for it (at least in stock saws) at 32:1... given the volume by oil make up of it - vs - oils with solvents.

--------------------------

Brad "My comment was not about H1-R, or any particular oil."
blsnelling said:
I think it's a mistake to make this assumption. Too rich for what? You're leaving protection totally out of the equation, which is the primary reason it was recommended.

Sooo what was Redbull making an assumption about? Answer: H1R being too rich at 32:1 in a stock saw based on his tests. Brad says it's a mistake so brad is referring to redbulls assumption about H1R. So your comment is about H1R and my assumption about h1r.

Brad says Too rich for what? Answer : "Stock saws" as stated! You're leaving protection totally out of the equation... I already covered this.

Good grief do you even read what I said!

Your responses don't have a lot to do with what I'm saying.
--------------------------------------------
next,

brad "You simply don't have near enough information to make that statement and have made many assumptions to come to that conclusion, all while leaving far more important variables out of the equation."

uhh so now you are commenting on a statement that I didn't even make!...you took out of context and you actually made it. And now your commenting on your own statement.

--------------------------------

next,

brad "You're now making statements as if they are facts."

specifically what statements?

-------------------------------------------
next,

brad "You do not know that an oil with some amount of solvent provides inferior lubrication than one without."

i didn't even say this. wth
--------------------------------------
next,

brad "You do not know that a few degrees hotter cylinder is a bad thing."

well according to the belray dude...the guy who actually formulated the oil and who is a chemical engineer. If he says that what I want is a combo of time, consistent temps and coolest temps. (Which I've repeatedly posted through this thread and on the condensed thread.) then im pretty inclined to take his word. Why because he formulated the oil. Because he's a chemical engineer. And because it makes logical sense!

Furthermore if the belray dude says that what is happening at 32:1 (in the 661 test) is the cylinder is slowing down and heating up because your not getting NEW oil and gas to cool things down. And if he says that what I want is not toooo much oil but EQUILIBRIUM. Then I am so inclined to believe him.
-------------------------------------------------
ok we'll take this step by step...

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad "I disagree with your stmt that 32:1 is too rich." - Don't take what I said out of context. Here is what I said for the 3rd time! - redbull660 said:

I still like that mastermind and others have had such good results with H1R....even at what seems to be too rich of a mixture for it (at least in stock saws) at 32:1... given the volume by oil make up of it - vs - oils with solvents.

--------------------------

Brad "My comment was not about H1-R, or any particular oil."
blsnelling said:
I think it's a mistake to make this assumption. Too rich for what? You're leaving protection totally out of the equation, which is the primary reason it was recommended.

Sooo what was Redbull making an assumption about? Answer: H1R being too rich at 32:1 in a stock saw based on his tests. Brad says it's a mistake so brad is referring to redbulls assumption about H1R. So your comment is about H1R and my assumption about h1r.

Brad says Too rich for what? Answer : "Stock saws" as stated! You're leaving protection totally out of the equation... I already covered this.

Good grief do you even read what I said!

Your responses don't have a lot to do with what I'm saying.
--------------------------------------------
next,

brad "You simply don't have near enough information to make that statement and have made many assumptions to come to that conclusion, all while leaving far more important variables out of the equation."

uhh so now you are commenting on a statement that I didn't even make!...you took out of context and you actually made it. And now your commenting on your own statement.

--------------------------------

next,

brad "You're now making statements as if they are facts."

specifically what statements?

-------------------------------------------
next,

brad "You do not know that an oil with some amount of solvent provides inferior lubrication than one without."

i didn't even say this. wth
--------------------------------------
next,

brad "You do not know that a few degrees hotter cylinder is a bad thing."

well according to the belray dude...the guy who actually formulated the oil and who is a chemical engineer. If he says that what I want is a combo of time, consistent temps and coolest temps. (Which I've repeatedly posted through this thread and on the condensed thread.) then im pretty inclined to take his word. Why because he formulated the oil. Because he's a chemical engineer. And because it makes logical sense!

Furthermore if the belray dude says that what is happening at 32:1 (in the 661 test) is the cylinder is slowing down and heating up because your not getting NEW oil and gas to cool things down. And if he says that what I want is not toooo much oil but EQUILIBRIUM. Then I am so inclined to believe him.
-------------------------------------------------
If the Belray guy said that he is an idiot as well. And seriously doubt he's an engineer..more likely a kid staffing their tech line..
 
based on what. support that with data.



well no kidding they are fairly similar.



why? support it with facts in the last 15yrs. well we know you aren't. for all we know, your sales for yamalube.

what else ya got?!?!? Nothing! haa just like before. Not a thing. Come on insult me again.
Yamalube 2R and K2 are totaly different in composition.
I have already posted pics of what H1R burns like and they were from 2014. And I don't work for any oil company.
You do a better job insulting yourself that I could ever do. Keep it up!
 
Going no where...

well maybe ya'll should put up a test or two. eh?

why am I the only one testing? Ya'll are so smart and think my stuff is meaningless. Do a test? Prove my results wrong!

Brad why don't you test this stuff already? Your porting saws after all. What's the point of porting a saw if you aren't trying to maximize performance?

If I was porting saws I'd be testing oils and ratios and chains and bars.

102 pages and 2000 posts and no one else has done a test. People said they were going to. But no one has!

First of all, I never said your stuff was meaningless. Quite the opposite. I also never said your results were wrong. They are what they are. They provide some interesting insight that what we've taken to be fact, MIGHT not be the case. I said your assumptions and conclusions drawn from those results MAY be wrong, and therefore should not be made as statements of truth. You simply don't have near enough information, data, or knowledge to make those judgments.

Why am I not out testing oil? First of all, if I have time to spend on saws, I'm usually porting someone elses. I have little time for my own stuff. More importantly, I have a life outside of saws. Plus, it really doesn't make that much difference to me. I do this for fun, because I enjoy it. When it can't be fun, it's not worth doing. Pick a quality oil, run it at 32:1 or 40:1 and enjoy a good life. It's simply not worth it to me to stress over this. When I have time, I would like to do some extreme boundary protection testing. After all, that's the single most important aspect of any lubricant. Furthermore, no oil is going to kill the performance of a chainsaw, ported or stock.
 
To 99% of the people this testing means nothing....pick an oil, pick a ratio, and cut wood. End of story.

I JUST LIKE OIL lol..... Different brands are fun to test 32:1 for me lol
You guys get it. None of us will ever prove that any one oil or ratio is the best.
 
huh? come on....

I said
redbull660 said:
I still like that mastermind and others have had such good results with H1R...even at what seems to be too rich of a mixture for it (at least in stock saws) at 32:1... given the volume by oil make up of it - vs - oils with solvents.

then you said
blsnelling said:
I think it's a mistake to make this assumption. Too rich for what? You're leaving protection totally out of the equation, which is the primary reason it was recommended.

I said the above about h1r and you said it's mistake to make assumption... ABOUT H1R lol



What if it looked like this Redbull?

This is what I seen? Brad would probably agree.
 
I challenge any ported 661 out there. You run 32:1 I'll run 50:1 h1r. same bar, same bar oil, get same gas but mix diff oil in obviously, and new chains.

That is a huge statement. .

I am pretty sure your azz will be handed to you.

Although I think your testing is fun, there are so many variables that you can't state the results as fact. The wood changes size with every cut (also knots, grain, etc ). Also, add in the fact that off the roll loops are not the same.. Some are very good... Some suck out of the box (I am talking RS that you used. There can be a difference loop to loop. Unless you spun them all from the same roll?)
 
I'm out. This is going no where.
l was out many pages ago due to one or two that have never had a foot up the a$$. But l keep dropping in to how many times ya's all been round the track. Its an endless journey the oil thread it just goes round and round but l must say its kinda dappa when the op posts Belray's side of the story and stuff. My saws parts and plastics wear out way faster than the engines. l have seen many stihl saws run on stihls cheapest orange bottle stuff and seen decades of service on farms. l can replace many of my saws within two years buy NOT running top dollar name brand ester base full synthetic oil. l think your better off finding a 'good' oil at a 'great' price, its actually easy. Full synthetic's biggest negative is price and you have to consider that in a commercial situation. There are plenty of fd rated semi synthetics out there at a fraction of the cost. You also need not worry about slow/poor ring seal during break in, rust, glazed piston's, loss of throttle response/power if one chooses a sensible 'semi synthetic' oil. Many semi synthetics are rated higher than their full synthetic cousins and give you kinda the best of 'both worlds'.
 
Yes. I think my muff modded 661 running 50:1 will beat a ported 661 running 32:1. I don't believe you can make up 7 seconds. I believe your running to much oil and it's slowing down the piston and overheating the saw.
This is getting flat out ridiculous. How much temp difference have you measured? Without going back, wasn't it less than 100 or maybe even 50? And that's going to overheat my saw? Give me a break. If you think your thinner oil ratio is going to outperform a ported saw....well, that is flat out delusional! Now I'm starting to sound like bwalker. But this is mind blowing.

Why can't I walk away, lol?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top